If Mueller was as close with Trump as he is with Comey

[christiefan915]

No one has to defend the POTUS. He won. You lost. Get over it already sheesh.

Maybe the POTUS will appoint his son in law as SP to investigate Mueller's investigation. It's OK because they're not best friends.

"No one" has to defend the POTUS, is that the new talking point? Greater legal minds than yours see it differently.

Maybe Y O U should offer to defend him of all the allegations.

Btw, it has nothing to do with winning or losing even though you are all working tirelessly to make it seem that way.

[GazzaQueen]

"No one" has to defend the POTUS, is that the new talking point? Greater legal minds than yours see it differently.

Maybe Y O U should offer to defend him of all the allegations.

Btw, it has nothing to do with winning or losing even though you are all working tirelessly to make it seem that way.

He won. You lost. I see you're having lots of trouble getting over it. You're not alone, dear.

[Truth Detector]

Gotta love the constant drum of the desperate RW "if/would" horseshit.

You guys are nothing if not consistent.

This from a moron who believes the constant drum beat of "The RUSSIANS!" isn't horseshit.

Go back to your bong dumbass and stop polluting the forum with your puerile stupidity.

[Truth Detector]

Thanks for proving my points concerning the massive ignorance of the righties on this forum. You validate that with your every post.

^Too stupid to comprehend irony.

[Truth Detector]

What we really need is someone that the ruler can trust, someone that has his interest @ heart & we gotta keep firing ppl till we get one...

I'm sure this is what you folks voted for, isn't it???

Do you think "folks" think liberal mockery of their voting choices and election process is what they want?

Dunce.

[Truth Detector]

lol....

Why not let an independent like putin select an impartial person??

Absurdity; the last refuge for ignorance and stupidity. Yay you!

[Truth Detector]

Who appointed Muller?

Who appointed a Special Prosecutor?

What party is investigating in congress?

Still clueless eh? No surprise there.

[Mr.Badguy]

Well since this investigation(s) isn't like some sort of contest between Trump and Comey, Meuller being "close" to Comey is much less relevant than if he were close to Trump. If Comey and his associates were being investigated and Meuller was the SP, then I'd be concerned.

[GazzaQueen]

Well since this investigation(s) isn't like some sort of contest between Trump and Comey, Meuller being "close" to Comey is much less relevant than if he were close to Trump. If Comey and his associates were being investigated and Meuller was the SP, then I'd be concerned.

Comey's meeting with Lynch regarding election influencing is a matter of investigation.

[domer76]

^Too stupid to comprehend irony.

lol

You fucking morons can't deal with reality. That's why you fucking idiots have to concoct your "if/would" worlds. Guess what, cockbite? "If/would" has never happened. But, keep flailing in your make believe universe, bitch. It's amusing.

[Damocles]

A personal relationship almost always results in a recusal. As you say, for appearances sake.

Unless you are an Obama AG and meet with the former President and husband of the target of investigation (matter)...

[Darth Omar]

I'll take the word of legal and ethics experts over Breitbart.

"Friendship or no, a pre-existing relationship doesn’t mean that Mueller’s role in the investigation rises to the level of a legal conflict of interest that would require recusal, said Craig Holman, government affairs lobbyist for the accountability and transparency lobbying organization Public Citizen:

Conflict of interest means there’s some financial or pecuniary benefit that could come one’s way [as a result of an investigation]. For example, If I had worked at a business and business has something at stake, that’s a conflict. But just people being friends and knowing each other, that’s not a conflict."

This George Washington law professor sees an issue with it:

"The Mueller and Comey history in the Bush administration would have been enough for me to scratch off his name from the list of possible special counsels. As the obstruction allegations grew against Trump, so did the discomfort over Mueller’s connections to Comey. The White House has said that Mueller interviewed with Trump for the FBI position to replace Comey. The day before he was made special counsel. Presumably, if this conversation occurred, Trump may have explained why he fired Comey and what he was looking for in his replacement. With obstruction now confirmed as a focus of the special counsel investigation, that makes Mueller a possible witness. It certainly raises the issue of whether Trump shared any thoughts material to his firing of Comey.

Mueller was appointed under 28 CFR 600.7, which states that “[t]he Special Counsel may be disciplined or removed from office only by the personal action of the Attorney General. The Attorney General may remove a Special Counsel for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies.” If Mueller is a potential witness, recusal or termination would be warranted under that standard as a conflict.

None of this is meant to cast aspersions on Mueller. No one has questioned his integrity. However, this investigation is already being discussed as the possible basis for the indictment or impeachment of a president. There should be no questions of motivation or bias as part of such an investigation. There are roughly 1.2 million lawyers in this country. Indeed, in Washington, you can throw a stick on any corner and hit ten out of the over 50,000 lawyers in the city."

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blo...ueller-may-not
_______________

'Best friends' is a strawman.

You don't need to watch football games or hang out most weekends with someone you are closely associated with professionally or on your job.

The professor nailed it and it's plain for the world to see: the SP is closely associated with a potential star witness in the investigation.

That's a WTF!?

Part of me hopes they go ahead with it because if Mueller starts getting outside pressure to recuse himself and he does it after the ball is rolling, the whole thing could fall apart.

[christiefan915]

He won. You lost. I see you're having lots of trouble getting over it. You're not alone, dear.

I've been over Hillary since 11/9 but you people won't let us forget her because you bring her up every single day. However we recognize it as a deflection from trump and his growing number of problems.

[GazzaQueen]

I've been over Hillary since 11/9 but you people won't let us forget her because you bring her up every single day. However we recognize it as a deflection from trump and his growing number of problems.

You want the POTUS to have problems because he beat the shingles off of the ancient crone. Get over it. She lost.

[christiefan915]

This George Washington law professor sees an issue with it:

"The Mueller and Comey history in the Bush administration would have been enough for me to scratch off his name from the list of possible special counsels. As the obstruction allegations grew against Trump, so did the discomfort over Mueller’s connections to Comey. The White House has said that Mueller interviewed with Trump for the FBI position to replace Comey. The day before he was made special counsel. Presumably, if this conversation occurred, Trump may have explained why he fired Comey and what he was looking for in his replacement. With obstruction now confirmed as a focus of the special counsel investigation, that makes Mueller a possible witness. It certainly raises the issue of whether Trump shared any thoughts material to his firing of Comey.

Mueller was appointed under 28 CFR 600.7, which states that “[t]he Special Counsel may be disciplined or removed from office only by the personal action of the Attorney General. The Attorney General may remove a Special Counsel for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies.” If Mueller is a potential witness, recusal or termination would be warranted under that standard as a conflict.

None of this is meant to cast aspersions on Mueller. No one has questioned his integrity. However, this investigation is already being discussed as the possible basis for the indictment or impeachment of a president. There should be no questions of motivation or bias as part of such an investigation. There are roughly 1.2 million lawyers in this country. Indeed, in Washington, you can throw a stick on any corner and hit ten out of the over 50,000 lawyers in the city."

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blo...ueller-may-not
_______________

'Best friends' is a strawman.

You don't need to watch football games or hang out most weekends with someone you are closely associated with professionally or on your job.

The professor nailed it and it's plain for the world to see: the SP is closely associated with a potential star witness in the investigation.

That's a WTF!?

Part of me hopes they go ahead with it because if Mueller starts getting outside pressure to recuse himself and he does it after the ball is rolling, the whole thing could fall apart.

Comey, Rosenstein and Mueller all have sterling credentials and a record of unbiased decisions. Rosenstein was confirmed by the Senate 94-6, not even close to being controversial.

Let's look at the real problem here. Comey, under oath, called trump a liar. Rosenstein testified he wouldn't fire Mueller without cause, trump's wishes notwithstanding. And Mueller is heading the investigation into trump.

All of these people showed their independent streak and that doesn't fly with trump. He wants an administration filled with yes-men who will swear loyalty to him. That's not the way the law works. Justice is supposed to be blind.